State v. . Stefanoff

May 2, 1934

Versions:206 N.C. 443

174 S.E. 411

1934 N.C. LEXIS 204

Stacy, C. J.

The record discloses that oil Thursday, 27 July, 1933, the defendants, Mike Stefanoff and R. E. Blаck, and two others not yet taken, planned to rob the Merchants and Farmers Bank of Taylorsville. The conspiracy took placе at the home of Mike Stefanoff in North Wilkesboro. The four conspirators drove to Taylorsville the next day, Friday, in a Chevrolet sedan, looked over the situation, but presently desisted from their purpose upon seeing a number of policemen on the street. They returned again the following morning, Saturday, in the same automobile, and entered the bаnk, not together but one at a time, so as to give the appearance that they were strangers. Stefanoff asked the cashier, T. C. Barnes, to change a quarter, and as the latter turned to get the chаnge, two of the bandits presented their guns, and, in the melee and firing which ensuеd, they shot the cashier to death.

Both of the defendants, after apprehension and incarceration, confessed their part in thе attempted robbery and homicide. The admission of these confеssions, made, as they were, while the defendants were under arrest, forms the basis of a number of exceptions. It is elementary that a voluntary сonfession is admissible in evidence against the one making it; an involuntary confession is not. A confession is voluntary in law when — and only when — it was in fact vоluntarily made. S. v. Jones, 203 N. C., 374, 166 S. E., 163.

Where there is no duress, threat or inducement, and the court found there was none here, the ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍fact that the defendants were under arrest at the time the confessions were made, does not ipso facto render them incompetent. S. v. Newsome, 195 N. C., 552, 143 S. E., 187; S. v. Drakeford, 162 N. C., 667, 78 S. E., 308. “We аre not aware of any decision which holds a confession, othеrwise voluntary, inadmissible because of the number of officers presеnt at the time it was made. Nor has the diligence of counsel discovеred any.” S. v. Gray, 192 N. C., 594, 135 S. E., 535.

The competency of the confessions was a matter for the judge. S. v. Whitener, 191 N. C., 659, 132 S. E., 603. He ruled them admissible. No error in this respect ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍has been made to appear on the record.

The defendant, Mike Stefanoff, interposed the further defense of mental irresponsibility or insanity. S. v. Keaton, 205 N. C., 607. He offered evidence tending to show that he is suffering from dementia prcecox, but the jury found against him on this plea. S. v. Jones, supra. His objections thаt nonexperts were ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍allowed to express opinions upon *445 bis sanity, or ability to know tbe difference between right and wrong, are not well founded. S. v. Keaton, supra; S. v. Jones, supra; S. v. Houser, 202 N. C., 738, 164 S. E., 114. Anyone wbo bas observed another, or conversed with him, or bad dealings with him, and a reasonable opportunity, based thereon, of fоrming an opinion, satisfactory to himself, relative to tbe mental cоndition of such person, is permitted to give bis opinion in evidence uрon tbe issue of mental capacity, though tbe witness be not a psyсhiatrist or expert in mental diseases. S. v. Keaton, supra. “One not an expert may give аn opinion, founded upon observation, ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍that a certain person is sane or insane.” Whitaker v. Hamilton, 126 N. C., 465, 35 S. E., 815.

Tbe case was tried upon tbe theory that if a сonspiracy were formed to rob tbe bank, and a murder committed by аny one or more of tbe conspirators in tbe attempted perpetration of tbe robbery, each and all of them would be guilty of tbе murder. This is a correct principle of law. S. v. Bell, 205 N. C., 225, 171 S. E., 50. It is provided by C. S., 4200 that a murder “which shall be committed in tbe perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any . . . robbery, burglary or other felony, shall be deemed tо be murder in tbe first degree.” S. v. Donnell, 202 N. C., 782, 164 S. E., 352; S. v. Miller, 197 N. C., 445, 149 S. E., 590; S. v. Logan, 161 N. C., 235, 76 S. E., 1. There was no evidence of a lesser degree of homicide. S. v. Spivey, 151 N. C., 676, 65 S. E., 995.

A searching investigation of tbe record leaves us with tbe impression that ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍it is free from reversible error. Tbe verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.